RENUKA YELLAMMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, petitioners have sought for to issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure 'h' dated 27. 1. 01 passed by the 2nd respondent and to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent/authorities to appoint poojaries from amongst eight banas in consonance with the order passed by this Court in W. P. No. 5578/75 and 5941/75 dated 6. 11. 84 at Annexure 'a' and also to issue a writ of mandamus to the respondent/authorities to frame necessary scheme for regularisation of performance of pooja and services of the poojaries by determining the emoluments and perquisites as per Section 11 of the Act and for such other orders.

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 is said to be a registered association comprising of poojaries of Sri Renuka Yellamma Devi and other satellite temples at Yellammana Gudda in Saundatti Taluk, Belgaum District. Petitioner No. 2 is the member of petitioner No. 1 association. According to the petitioners, they are performing poojas, archanas and other rituals of the said temple since time immemorial; the priests and poojaries of the said temples were originally shivaits and in course of time they became veerashaivas, later they were known as Adi Banajigas, Jarjepara Padadi Bagi, which is a separate sect confined to poojary families; the daily rituals and occasional worships do not fall directly within the category of Shaivagama which is followed in Shiva temples in south India; though the rituals do involve vedic and puranic manthras as illustrated in the book called Renuka Panchanga including Sahasranama, Astothara Stotra and other Sanskrit rhymes prescribed in Scand purana, pampa purana and vayu purana as well as dharmatantra but they are not particularly prescribed in any agamas; but, by practice they were followed by poojaris in performance of pooja and has been continued by succession in their families and petitioner also well-versed in performance of rituals, poojas and occasional worships and functions in accordance with their customs and traditions accepted and prevailing in the said temple; the temple has an impact of jainism and shaivism; till 1903, the poojaries were alone performing the pooja and also administering the affairs of the temple; in 1903, as there were some disputes, a panch committee was constituted in pursuance of the Court order and there also the poojaries were being treated as important persons; later, in the year 1935, a scheme was framed and a commissioner was appointed in the matter of administration of the temple and sharing of the offerings by panchas and poojaries; however, thereafter, in the year 1950, the Bombay Public Trusts Act came into force and the temple was registered under the said Act; thereafter, in the year 1974 the act was promulgated by the state government called the Renuka Yellamma Devastana (Administration) Act of 1974; as per Section 4 of the said Act, an executive officer was appointed for the maintenance of the temple and appointment of poojaries and other staff, under the provisions of the Act, no power was conferred on any of the parties for removal of existing poojaries or for disturbing their rights; however, the provisions of the Act interfered with the rights already vested in the poojaries in the matter of endowments which according to poojaries was fundamental right to property and a right of profession; as such they preferred writ petitions questioning the constitutional validity of the Act in W. P. Nos. 5578/75 and 5941/75; in the said petitions after noticing several issues relating to the custom, usage and practice it was ordered that poojaries have to be the persons from 8 banas and accordingly, by order dated 6. 11. 1984 it was suggested to appoint persons only from amongst 8 banas and outsiders would be appointed only in the event of poojaris not being fit and suitable or not being available for appointment from amongst 8 banas.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, although there was an order passed by this Court there is no change in the existing position and the same has been continued asusual; in the year 1986, the Executive Officer issued notices to some of the poojaries calling upon them for appointment; however, no further steps were taken in furtherance of the notice; in the year 1989, an advertisement was issued by the Executive Officer calling for applications for appointment of poojaries as per Annexure 'b' and pursuant to which, no appointment orders were issued; later in the year 1991, again a dispute arose regarding the rights of he poojaries and the respondent/executive Officer literally prevented the poojaries from receiving the offerings; as such, W. P. No. 2195/91 was filed by petitioner No. 1 wherein since the pleadings were insufficient the same was withdrawn and another W. P. No. 25479/91 was filed questioning the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Act; in the meanwhile, respondents appointed 7 members from amongst the poojaries as per Annexure 'd' as against several other members to defeat the rights of the petitioners and to the writ petition filed by the petitioners, respondents filed statement of objections stating that they have made appointments and the said persons are performing the pooja. According to the petitioners, to defeat their claim, the respondent/authority has appointed respondents 5 to 18 on daily wages, which appointments were subject to the result of the writ petition and the said appointments are against the custom, usage and also contrary to the order of the division bench of this Court at Annexure 'a'. Further, during the pendency of the writ petition No. 25479/91 in order to resolve the dispute between the poojaries and the Trust, a resolution was passed on 29. 12. 96 recognising the poojaries as customary poojaries and further agreed to appoint them by providing necessary amenities which is as per Annexure 'g'; the poojaries appointed on daily wages i. e. , respondents 5 to 18 under the apprehension that they may not be continued as poojaries filed an appeal under Section 17 of the Act before the Endowment Commissioner questioning the resolution passed by the Trust wherein without impleading the petitioners and without giving any notice, the said appeal came to be allowed holding the resolution passed by the Trust as illegal; the filing of the appeal by respondents 5 to 18 was noticed by the petitioners only during February'01 when the order came to be enforced against them and W. PNo. 25479/91 pending before the single bench was referred to the division bench. The Division Bench noting that the similar writ petitions in W. P. Nos. 5578-5941/75 challenging the constitutional validity were disposed of, held that petitioners could not re-agitate the same once again in W. P. 25479/91 and accordingly, dismissed the petition on the ground of constructive resjudicata; after the disposal of W. P. 25479/91 petitioners made a representation to the respondents for making appointment and to recognise them for receiving the benefits as per the provisions of the Act at Annexure 'k'; according to the petitioners, despite the decision of this Court requiring the respondents to appoint persons from family of poojaries among 8 banas, no action has been taken by the respondents and in turn, their legitimate rights have been denied and further no steps are taken by the Executive Officer to act in consonance with the direction issued by this Court. Hence, the petition.